Despite a bipartisan effort...

For a total of $1,300M. By ways of some random comparative context: at the end of the worst year at Wall Street in decades, its companies handed out a total of $18,000M in bonuses.

18 billion dollars in bonuses? For what? Doing a **** job?

What the **** are they gonna spend it on I wonder? More French made mini jets? German sports cars? A new mansion used once or twice a year?

And the poor continue to scrape the bottom of the barrel with two jobs, and soon, they probably wont even have that.

What the ****.

entitlement programs do get stimulus bang for the buck.

T
K
O

Laugh away! However I want to point out that I just read an opinion by one of Obamas people who controlls the 800 billion + that they are afraid to pass oversite on the compensation of CEOs because they might not apply to the government for tax money. If a company or a bank can afford to pay multimillion compensation then why in the hell should they be entitled to tax money. Its going just as I said in washington. Republican, democrat, Bush, Obama its business as usual. The big money people get all the money and the common citizen gets screwed. Come on all you Obamites jump on me and tell me what a fool I am but I have been telling you right along that politician and crook are sonomous. But of course my 73 years of experience with the crooked democratic U.S. government dident mean anything before and wont mean anything now. What a bunch of shyt. I voted for Obama because it was him or another rep government. I wasent proud of my vote like I should have been.

Well yeah I agree with that - kind of the point of that sarcastic video.

I say: no billion-dollar bailouts for big business without some oversight for the government. If the government is going to lend or give those businesses hundreds of billions of dollars more, it should damn well be in a position to stop them being spent on such things as exorbitant bonuses for failing execs.

As it happens, this is what liberal Dems are pushing for. The TARP from last year had practically no teeth this way whatsoever. Now the Dems are in power, liberal Dems see the opportunity to include more control by the government over how all these billions in loans are used. In fact, the House has even already passed a bill that would allow new, stricter limits to "apply retroactively to executives from companies that have already received TARP money".

But the liberals are only part of the Democratic caucuses. Especially in the Senate, many centrists are hesitant to apply government oversight with all too much teeth. So they're stalling on adopting that House bill and passing something similar in the Senate. Obama himself seems to be on the brink between the sides. He's loudly condemning the bonuses, but he apparently isn't willing yet to follow-up with some real-teeth legislation. Or to advocate for that House bill, for example.

So by all means, if you have a Democratic Senator or Congressman, call 'm and tell 'm what you want. The Democratic Party is not some lock-step homogenous unit, it has flanks and wings. If you want action on this, help the liberal Dems push it through over Obama's hesitations, and over outright resistance from conservatives, Republicans and centrist "Blue Dog" Democrats.

Call your Senator and tell his office that you want the Senate to adopt Barney Frank's "TARP Reform and Accountability Act," which the House already approved.

It is obvious that Cyclptichorn does not read anything that it not sanctioned with the imprimatur of the left wingers at Berekeley. If he had, he would discover that Amity Shlaes--in her book "The Forgotten Man" wrote--

"...businesses decided to wait Roosevelt out, hold on to their cash, and invest in future years. Yet Roosevelt retaliated by introducing a tax--the undistributed profit tax--to press the money out of them. Such forays prevented recovery and took the country into the depression within the Depression of 1937 and 1938"

Before Cycloptichorn dismisses Ms. Shales' thesis as he has dismissed the Wall Street Journal, he should know that the far far left magazine--The Nation--wrote of Shlaes's "Forgotten Man'----"Shlaes is, of course, correct that the New Deal failed to restore economic health"

It is obvious that President Obama is a shameless populist who is going the same way Roosevelt did---spend billions on goverment projects( remember the AAA, the NRA, the WPA--all government bureaucracies which FAILED to get our country out of a long depression( 1931-1937).

Roosevelt led the country out of the Depression ONLY when the USA began to ready for war. Will President Obama lead us into the same trap??

I would be much more amenable to following nimh's suggestions if I knew that he was personally involved in the US Economy. But, since he is a European, in my mind, he is highly suspect.

Like most Europeans, he is a hard left Socialist.

My great-grandfather was a hard left Socialist. Stalin sent him to the gulag!

Suddenly we're eating MORE food? That's the only way our Ag industry will grow. Or the trucking industry needed to transport food, etc. Can you cite an economist who says simply feeding ourselves will make our economy grow?

I agree we have an acute problem. But many economists believe allowing the government to simply print money and spend it on entitlement programs will lead to disaster down the road.

Want to get money in the economy quickly? Cut income taxes in half. Allow workers to keep half their withholding taxes each check. That puts more money in the economy now, week after week; not a one shot deal, like the silly Bush $500 'rebate.'

Workers would have more money to spend every week. They could plan ahead for purchases, realize a bigger income for those big ticket items such as cars or other goods they might need.

If that's the true goal of the Obama administration, getting money into the economy, this would be a simple way to infuse cash into the system.

But as many people believe, why waste a good crisis? Like cyclops says, one day everyone will be getting their entitlement checks from the government...

Why does congress feel they have to hide so many entitlements from the American public? You didn't address this before?

And something all you 'progressives' seemed to have ignored in my initial post:

It WAS a bipartisan group of dems and repubs who voted against this bill in the house. It was passed on a straight dem vote...

Of course they will ignore it, Lone Voice since it casts a shadow on President Obama's supposed invulnerablity.

What the Progressives( sic) will not admit is that

l.Most white people did not vote for President Obama. He owes his election to African- Americans and Hispanics.

2. Clearly, some Democratic House Members seem to be aware that the people in their Districts are NOT in favor of the wild spending proposed by President Obama so they did not vote for the bill. If they were certain that they would have no political trouble at home voting for the bill, they would have gone along if just to curry favor with the Democratic leaders.

3. The Republicans in the House are outnumbered but evidently not giving in.

If Republicans are too ashamed that they've built a small tent party, they can sort our their shame elsewhere.

He owes his election to the sum of all his voters independent of race. Obama got about 9 million more votes than McCain. Deal with it.

T
K
O

I will repeat what I said.

Most white people did not vote for President Obama. He owes his election to African-Americans and Hispanics.

NOTE BELOW-

Voter demographics
The following statistics are based on a CNN exit poll taken on November 4.[177](OF COURSE, CNN, BEING A LEFT WING OUTFIT, IS SUSPECT)

Size Obama McCain Other
Party
Democratic 39% 89% 10% 1%
Independent 29% 52% 44% 4%
Republican 32% 10 % 89% 1%
Ideology
Liberal 22% 89% 10% 1%
Moderate 44% 60% 39% 1%
Conservative 34% 20% 78% 2%
Race
Black 13% 95% 4% 1%
Hispanic 9% 67% 31% 2%
White 74% 43% 55% 2%
Asian 2% 62% 35% 3%
Other 3% 66% 31% 3%

****************************************************************

95% of African-Americans
67% of Hispanics.
ONLY 43% OF WHITES.
*********************************************************************

Small tent party? Small tent party?

We will see if President Obama really believes in his INCLUSIVENESS mantra or if he pushes AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND BORDER OPENNESS TO AN EXTREME.

If he is really for "Inclusion", he will include the ideas of most White Americans who are against automatic citizenship for all illegals and he will cut the ruinous practice of insisting that African American students be allowed entry into Universities where most of them will never rise above the median of the class.

Will he allow "whites" into his tent? Really allow?

Ah Possum, how we've missed you.

What's Posner saying about all of this?



I'm sorry to hear that. Many a good socialist perished in Stalin's death camps.

Article from CNN below detailing what House Republican leaders consider waste.

I have to say that I agree with a lot of it (being waste). While many of these may contribute to the economy they ALSO appear to be a backdoor to implementing many of the Democratic policies that DESERVE to be argued in the Senate. They I also suspect that they are likely less effective than other means of job creation. I'd propose that most of these be eliminated and the amount of money we borrow from China be reduced.
_________________________________________________




(CNN) -- On Monday, House Republican leaders put out a list of what they call wasteful provisions in the Senate version of the nearly $900 billion stimulus bill that is being debated:


The Senate is currently the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus bill.

• $2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

• A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.

• $650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.

• $88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).

• $448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.

• $248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters.

• $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees.

• $400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.

• $1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.

Don't Miss
GOP senators draft stimulus alternative
• $125 million for the Washington sewer system.

• $150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.

• $1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.

• $75 million for "smoking cessation activities."

• $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges.

• $75 million for salaries of employees at the FBI.

• $25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction.

• $500 million for flood reduction projects on the Mississippi River.

• $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas.

• $6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

• $500 million for state and local fire stations.

• $650 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.

• $1.2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job programs.

• $88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.

• $412 million for CDC buildings and property.

• $500 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.

• $160 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for National and Community Service.

• $5.5 million for "energy efficiency initiatives" at the Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration.

• $850 million for Amtrak.

• $100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.

• $75 million to construct a "security training" facility for State Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.

• $110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.

• $200 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for use on military installations.

That all adds up to about 19 billion dollars.

And the total bill is 900 billion dollars. You're complaining about 2% of the spending.

This is the same asinine thing that Republicans have been doing with Earmarks, forever. Sure, it's important to cut waste. But you're missing the big picture here. Even if we reduce every one of these expenses out of the bill - and we shouldn't - it would make no difference whatsoever to our nation's finances.

And some stuff on this list definitely isn't 'waste' -


• $6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

Uh, do you think this isn't going to create construction jobs? That it won't result in more efficient buildings, which save the taxpayers money?

• $2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

Again, even though I'm against clean coal (it's a myth) this will create jobs and infrastructure. How can it be labeled 'waste?' Republicans ran on clean-coal plants such as this one.

That's half the price of the 'waste' list right there.

Useless muttering, focus on the big picture plz.

Cycloptichorn

Cool, less than 2%, so let's wipe it out. It won't mean much right?

I just showed ya that half of it isn't 'waste.' I'm sure individual arguments could be made for the other line items.

And it doesn't really matter, either. B/c the Dems control the Congress, in both houses, they could just bring up a spending bill with all the items you want 'cut out,' and then pass them separate. You may want to see a debate about every line item, but the Congress doesn't have time to do that. And the debate won't matter much, the Dems have such an advantage, they'll just pass what they like anyway.

Cycloptichorn

I hope ya'll take the time to read Nimh's post on Observationalism regarding how the Republicans are using the stimulus package as spin.

Took the time. Didn't help.